Colburn v. Groton
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Cask, for injuries received by a traveller by reason of an alleged defect in a highway. Verdict for the defendants. The plaintiff proposed to show that Mrs. Estes, who was riding with the plaintiff in a sleigh at the time of the accident, was thrown out and injured, and that the town settled an action for damages brought by Mrs. Estes by paying her claim. The evidence was excluded, and the plaintiff excepted. The place of the accident was a curve on the side of a hill.
Read the full summary
Cask, for injuries received by a traveller by reason of an alleged defect in a highway. Verdict for the defendants. The plaintiff proposed to show that Mrs. Estes, who was riding with the plaintiff in a sleigh at the time of the accident, was thrown out and injured, and that the town settled an action for damages brought by Mrs. Estes by paying her claim. The evidence was excluded, and the plaintiff excepted. The place of the accident was a curve on the side of a hill. The alleged defect in the road was its sloping form and icy condition, and the want of a railing. The plaintiff proposed to…
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
In a criminal case, when the defendant’s confession is offered as evidence, it is necessary to inquire whether it was made under the influence of hope or of fear, and for the purpose of gaining some benefit or avoiding some harm connected with the criminal charge. If not made for that purpose, it is held to be voluntary, and is evidence. The purpose of the confession is a question of fact. This distinctly appears in State v. Wentworth, 37 N. H. 196, 218-220, and other cases in which the reported decisions contain a full examination of the evidence bearing on the question. In State v. Howard,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Shoemaker v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- M'lanahan v. the Universal Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Railroad Co. v. FraloffSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Draper v. Inhabitants of HatfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Smith v. RichardsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Pyne v. Jamaica Nutrition Holdings Ltd.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- United States v. Boston, C. C. & N. Y. Canal Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1921
- Esser v. BropheySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Hill v. HilesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1941
- People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. ForsterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.